Primarily for fighters and barbarians, but much of what's in here pertains to rangers and paladins as well.
Nice guide. I do have a disagreement though. On the two weapon fighting build is it really worth it to suffer the -2 to hit? It would seem to me that build relies on hitting as often as possible to deal the damage since you aren't relying on a big STR weapon/modifier. The 10% drop in hits might be too much. I would guess statistically hitting more often with say 1d6 shortswords will net more damage than hitting less often with d10 bastard swords.
Hey AdAstraGames, let me know if you'd like to have your guide added to d20pfsrd.com. You could have a page just like Treantmonk and add your neat guide in there easily. Since we use Google Sites you can just embed your Google Doc in a page and then continue editing your Google Doc as normal. Let me know!
I don't agree with your take on Improved Critical. Doubling the chance of a critical hit as well as the chance of inflicting a condition on the enemy is a big increase to your overall damage and combat prowess. I certainly think making a creature staggered is a bit more than just 'nice'.
And you cant stack keen and Imp Critical together..which means if you want to increase your crit range you pretty much have to take Imp Critical to gaurantee yourself the advantages..not all off us can rely on going out and buying a keen weapon in our games
I don't agree with your take on Improved Critical. Doubling the chance of a critical hit as well as the chance of inflicting a condition on the enemy is a big increase to your overall damage and combat prowess. I certainly think making a creature staggered is a bit more than just 'nice'.
I agree ... especially for a switch hitter with a falchion.
With improved critical and critical focus you double the threat range from 18-20 to 15-20 and add a +4 bonus to confirm critical hits.
Although I have to agree with the OP that the VERY nice critical feats are lvl 15 and 17. Which is a pretty steep requirement. But the blinding and bleeding is do-able imho. And a 2d6 bleed damage which stacks with other bleeding attacks is pretty much free damage :)
Overall I think the guide is pretty nice, and will use it to consider some feats for my Switch Hitter ranger :)
-TDL
Not a bad start, I'm looking forward to seeing this guide built up a bit more, as there is so much to be built upon.
That said, I have to second some disagreements- you shouldn't duel-weld bastard swords- at least not if you're going for an optimal build- a two- weapon fighter will have great dexterity- which means his strength will suffer, he'll need weapon finesse (you can finesse scimitars if memory serves by the way). Two weapon fighting isn't a great damage dealing option for a fighter in Pathfinder, which isn't to say it's not a good option for fighters, which brings me to my second point...
Improved critical is great, doubling your critical output double the statuses that can be caused by the critical feats- which is more helpful that damage most times- a duel-weilding kukri fighter is one of the best choices there are.
You might want to rate the styles- defensive, for example, is less effective than Big Hitter in most cases.
But yeah, not a bad start at all.
Here's why I recommend against 'heavy and light' weapons for TWF in favor of two weapons.
Assume you've got the following stats:
STR 16
DEX 15
CON 10
INT 13
WIS 12
CHA 8
This is a 20 point build, 2nd level, human fighter.
We'll do this two ways.
1st: EWF: Bastard Sword
1st: Two Weapon Fighting
1st: Double Slice.
2nd: Weapon Focus: Bastard Sword
Two masterwork bastard swords (700 GP of kit)
Your melee bonus is 2+3+1+1-4 for a net of +3/+3, and each hit does 1d10+3.
You're going to be dealing with foes with an AC of 14-18, and your teammate the cleric is probably popping a Bless as the first thing he does.
Now, we'll do it the conventional way. Same feats, but fighting with a short sword and a bastard sword.
STR 16
DEX 15
CON 10
INT 13
WIS 12
CHA 8
This is a 20 point build, 2nd level, human fighter.
1st: Weapon Focus, Long Sword
1st: Two Weapon Fighting
1st: Double Slice.
2nd: Weapon Focus: Short Sword
Your melee bonus is 2+3+1+1-2 for a net of +5/+5, and half the hits do 1d6+3.
The statistical damage for the conventional way remains identical up to dealing with AC 18, more or less, and then gets better against higher ACs.
However - as accuracy for both improves, this difference drops.
By the time 4th level rolls around, the dual bastard sword user gets Weapon Specialization adding +2 to each weapon on each hand, while the conventional longsword/shortsword fighter only gets it on one hand.
This pattern repeats when Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization hit. By the time GWF hits, one feat means that the Double Bastard guy is only +1 to hit off on the secondary weapon.
There is also a threshold affect that happens through to about 3rd or 4th level: The chance that you can get a one round kill on a fresh opponent is MUCH greater when you're throwing around d10+3 for each attack that hits rather than d8 or d6 +3.
Why Improved Critical Isn't Worth It (Redux)
1) It does NOT stack with Keen.
2) Keen is a VERY cheap thing to add to a weapon.
3) It is the only feat out there that can be made obsolete by spending money.
Which is why I put in two proposed rewrites on it in the guide. :)
Money is a much more accessible resource than feats are, even for a fighter who gets 21 or 22 feats.
two different weapons is a sub optimal build as you showed. What about a pair of short swords to take advantage of those feats without taking them twice? The only difference is d10 vs d6, but the d6 will have a +2 to hit, and hit 10% more often.
improved crit- IMO, is useful to take as a fighter, with feats to spare, but for martial classes with less feats, the weapon enhancement is prob a better way to go. It's true you can compensate with money, but since you will need half the char total wealth to get those 2 weapons maxed, it should be a consideration to use the feat.
Since you go (slightly) beyond core by discussing potential house rules (Improved Critical), then you might want to mention Oversized Two Weapon fighting. It eliminates the penalty for not using a light weapon in the off hand.
|
Seriously man, I have to agree with MIB, there's not a lot of explanation in any specific area, and your feat choices seem really odd. I can't think of a time when I've ever wanted the current incarnation of the Vital Strike feat tree, and you suggest Stand Still against tripping? I'll admit that as the game goes on, tripping gets less viable, but I'd rather floor an opponent with my reach and later make them provoke for it than just hold up a guy who walked within five feet of me.
I just don't see enough in this guy to really justify using it, sorry man.
Why Improved Critical Isn't Worth It (Redux)
1) It does NOT stack with Keen.
2) Keen is a VERY cheap thing to add to a weapon.
3) It is the only feat out there that can be made obsolete by spending money.Which is why I put in two proposed rewrites on it in the guide. :)
Money is a much more accessible resource than feats are, even for a fighter who gets 21 or 22 feats.
And once again I will point out that not every GM lets you go out and buy upgrades to weapons at the drop of a hat...especially in APs where you can be restricted to what you find in the adventure...in that case Improved Critical becomes almost essential ...
not only that I don't see where you get the idea that Keen is a cheap enhancement..to add it to a +1 weapon is going to cost you 16000 gold..that's the entire supposed wealth of a 6th level character...adding it to higher grade weapons is even worse...to put it on a weapon that has a +2 enhancement costs 24000gp...your argument doesn't stack up against the economics..unless you expect the entire party to contribute its wealth to the fighters weapon(s) on a regular basis.
Why Improved Critical Isn't Worth It (Redux)
1) It does NOT stack with Keen.
2) Keen is a VERY cheap thing to add to a weapon.
3) It is the only feat out there that can be made obsolete by spending money.Which is why I put in two proposed rewrites on it in the guide. :)
Money is a much more accessible resource than feats are, even for a fighter who gets 21 or 22 feats.
And once again I will point out that not every GM lets you go out and buy upgrades to weapons at the drop of a hat...especially in APs where you can be restricted to what you find in the adventure...in that case Improved Critical becomes almost essential ...
not only that I don't see where you get the idea that Keen is a cheap enhancement..to add it to a +1 weapon is going to cost you 16000 gold..that's the entire supposed wealth of a 6th level character...adding it to higher grade weapons is even worse...to put it on a weapon that has a +2 enhancement costs 24000gp...your argument doesn't stack up against the economics..unless you expect the entire party to contribute its wealth to the fighters weapon(s) on a regular basis.
Don't you mean a minimum of 6000gp? I would actually use it, as you are likely to get a +2 equivalent weapon at lower level than Improved Critical becomes available. At higher level, though, you are better off with Improved Critical, because when you add the +1 value of keen onto a +3 or +4 weapon it gets way expensive as you point out.
As for stacking the Improved Critical and Keen features, I would say (as a little house rule) having both does not increase the threat range more than one does, but that the critical multiplier should be increased by one instead if you have both. So your Rapier has a threat range of 15-20/x2 with either Improved Critical or Keen, but with both it goes to 15-20/x3.
I've had it with the lack of a good fighter handbook, so I'm working on one now. Treantmonk, be aware I'll be pinching you format (but I don't know how to use google docs) I'll post it in a knew thread in a day or two. If anyone wants to google dock it (if you like it) feel free, I won't mind.
Cheers.
Google docs is easy. I didn't know how to use it either, but have a basic understanding now...pretty user friendly - go open up a "new" doc - and it works similar to any word processor. Then you want to "Share" it so others can view.
CON can actually be a dump stat (no skills are driven by it, you have big hit dice, and it adds to your one non-sucky saving throw)
I nearly spit-taked by coffee when I read that. Was it an attempt at humour? If so: *claps*, if not: "WHAT???"
My bad don't know why i read it as a +2..still 6000 gp at level 4 or 5 is still a hefty sum to pay for something you can get for free..
If you could have a keen weapon it would be cheap- but now you have to have a +1 enchantment before you can put anything else on the weapon- so it's a +1 keen weapon- not so cheap, and if you're using criticals you might want two weapons- that's two +2 weapons- for a trick that costs one feat to apply to both.
CON can actually be a dump stat (no skills are driven by it, you have big hit dice, and it adds to your one non-sucky saving throw)
How didn't I notice this? bad bad! What if your Hit die rolls result in a one for three levels? That con is needed always!You can never have too much HP!
CON can actually be a dump stat (no skills are driven by it, you have big hit dice, and it adds to your one non-sucky saving throw)How didn't I notice this? bad bad! What if your Hit die rolls result in a one for three levels? That con is needed always!You can never have too much HP!
Depends on your game. Many DMs do a simple "half max + 1 + Con bonus" or "3/4 Max + Con bonus" for hit points rather than have the players roll. In those circumstances Con isn't so important because you don't necessarily need a high con to offset bad rolls. My own fighter builds tend to be fast and smart rather than tough and strong, so a high con is not my primary concern. That said, I wouldn't make it a dump stat by any stretch, if by a dump stat you mean anything that will gain you a negative modifier.
Edit: I recall a low-con fighter from literature, from Michael Moorcock's Hawkmoon series ... it could be challenging ...
Depends on your game. Many DMs do a simple "half max + 1 + Con bonus" or "3/4 Max + Con bonus" for hit points rather than have the players roll. In those circumstances Con isn't so important because you don't necessarily need a high con to offset bad rolls.No, in those games Con isn't so important because the GM is giving players somewhere between .5 and 2 HP extra for free every level.
Exactly. Con is more important in some games than in others. In some, a fighting character can afford to not run Con through the roof.
Depends on your game. Many DMs do a simple "half max + 1 + Con bonus"...CON can actually be a dump stat (no skills are driven by it, you have big hit dice, and it adds to your one non-sucky saving throw)How didn't I notice this? bad bad! What if your Hit die rolls result in a one for three levels? That con is needed always!You can never have too much HP!
A bit off topic, but I've never fully understood that rule. Why the +1? It seems to benefit the low HD classes a lot more than the high HD ones. I'd at least make it so that d10 and d12 classes get +2.
A bit off topic, but I've never fully understood that rule. Why the +1? It seems to benefit the low HD classes a lot more than the high HD ones. I'd at least make it so that d10 and d12 classes get +2.You simulate average rolls if you give max/2 half the time and max/2 + 1 the other half of the time. Some people give out max/2 + 1 all the time because keeping track of the math is easier.
Yeah, I get that, but the +1 is a lot more valuable for a d6 character than a d12 one. The d6 character is getting 4 hp(67% of max HD)+con each level while the d12 is getting 7 hp (58% of max HD)+con each level. If the d12 one would get +2 each level the percentages would be even.
I guess the +1 on every other level is okay, though.
Yeah, I get that, but the +1 is a lot more valuable for a d6 character than a d12 one. The d6 character is getting 4 hp(67% of max HD)+con each level while the d12 is getting 7 hp (58% of max HD)+con each level. If the d12 one would get +2 each level the percentages would be even.Compared to average rolls, it's +.5 HP per level regardless of the size of your hit die.
Yeah, I know. I'm just saying that the .5 HP is more valuable to the lower hit die classes.
I still disagree with many of the assessments, but, hey, we'll let lets of flowers bloom here. :)
CON as dump stat:
1) The vast majority of D&D/Pathfinder games I've played in have been max at first level, plus half or three quarters of max at each level. At that point, CON is a dump stat.
2) In general, a bonus for CON is less useful to a fighter than a bonus to WIS - Save or Suck spells are more dangerous to you than low hit points, particularly with area effect spam heal available.
3) Dump stat is a relative term here. Would I take a CON of 9? Yes. Because the odds that -1 HP per die are going to kill me before 4th level are pretty low. Would I ever buy CON past about 12? Not unless I'm playing a Barbarian or it's called for by concept. Given a choice between CON 14/WIS 10, and CON 10/WIS 14, the first is more conventional, the second is generally better.
Would I take a CON of less than 8? No.
Dear AdAstraGames:
First, I apreciate and thank your effort in doing thi guide.
Second, I am under the impression that you build your optimizaton handbook based on your group's house rules and particular 'style'. This kind of Handbooks are go to a very broad number of groups, so it isn't reasonable to asume, to the point of not even notifying, that everyone uses the same rules beyond the core.
Finally, in consideration of the statements expresed in your:
-Even the Core Rulebook warns players that a low CON ussually means death, not even lich-wannabes dumps it. Frontliners should manage a 14 on CON at least and consider Toughness.
-STR is more important than DEX, unless you are weapon finesse TWFer with the whole WF-WG maxed and penetrating Strike or an archer.
-Combat Reflexes only works if you have a way of forcing your enemies to generate attacks of oportunity, most comon being having reach.
-At 20 lvl a critter hits +30 at first level they hit +3, do the math about AC usefulness and its cost of oportunity.
-If you are so afraid of the will or die spells, be a dwarf (I prefer Human).
Humbly,
Yawar
PSD: due to respect to our dear people here at Paizo Messageboards, my fellow Pathfinder fans and said messageboards policies, certain 'feelings and expression' of the poster where omited.